New Full Frame Camera in Testing [CR1]

[pwp]

I'd get it if its 3999$

At $4k , how does Canon differentiate it from the 5d3? Maybe 5d3 goes to where it should be...$2500?  Otherwise, it's more likely to be closer to $5k.

Perhaps this will be the point that Canon eases pricing on the 5D3 down towards 5D2 levels, thus enabling Canon to comfortably pitch the new camera into the $4k - $5k price-point. I doubt it will be a 1-Series camera. For a start it would need to price itself so far out from the competition it would be a very low volume seller, and secondly, if it's a 40+Mp camera it's target market is not going to need the ultra high performance criteria of the 1DX. It will be used for more considered work. I see the target market as the same one that bought into the original 5D Classic.

PW

[FunPhotons]

Assuming this rumor is true, I'd think Canon would still wait a couple of years before releasing it.  Everyone that would buy a camera like this just bought a D800/e or Canon 5D III; and if you're a professional you purchased two or three of them.  It will be at least three years before I consider purchasing another camera.

Everyone?? I see a lot of 5D II owners like myself that are not pushed to go to a 5DIII at all. And put off by the pain of starting a Nikon lenses collection. 5K for a camera along these lines would cost the same as a D800 and a 14-24mm lens and I'd be back to using my Canon 14mm L, 17mm TSE L, 24mm TSE L, and 24mm 1.4 L for architecture and landscape. Sign me up!

Agreed. I wouldn't mind upgrading my 5DMKII (and keeping the 5D), I'd especially appreciate a 1 series body. The 5DMKIII and 1DX leave me cold though as I don't do any sports or wedding photography. As usual there is a lots of talk about how we don't need more pixels. So what? I could use a new body, and I want new features. Give me the new AF system, more pixels and a 1D body, I'd buy it in a second. In exchange I'll throw away FPS and possibly ISO.

[wickidwombat]

if they were smart they would make the same guts available in the 1Dx shell and the 5D3 shell
shouldnt cost any more in reality and would make it appeal to a broader spectrum of users

[mjbehnke]

I wouldn't mind seeing a high megapixel FF camera without Video. Make it a straight photo camera and get rid of all the video stuff. I don't use video and would not be turned off by a nice high end FF that doesn't have it. Just my Humble opinion.

[pwp]

if they were smart they would make the same guts available in the 1Dx shell and the 5D3 shell
shouldn't cost any more in reality and would make it appeal to a broader spectrum of users

You've nailed it again! I want a camera with GUTS! Sign me up.

PW

[Deeohuu]

Assuming this rumor is true, I'd think Canon would still wait a couple of years before releasing it.  Everyone that would buy a camera like this just bought a D800/e or Canon 5D III; and if you're a professional you purchased two or three of them.  It will be at least three years before I consider purchasing another camera.

Everyone?? I see a lot of 5D II owners like myself that are not pushed to go to a 5DIII at all. And put off by the pain of starting a Nikon lenses collection. 5K for a camera along these lines would cost the same as a D800 and a 14-24mm lens and I'd be back to using my Canon 14mm L, 17mm TSE L, 24mm TSE L, and 24mm 1.4 L for architecture and landscape. Sign me up!

There are a few possible approaches to take.

1) Recognise that actually owning camera equipment is not very worthwhile unless it is making you money and/or you're using it regularly and then when you need it, rent/hire whatever happens to be the latest/best.

1a) Start up a Nikon lens collection, whilst keeping your Canon lens collection and just rent whatever body happens to be the latest/best/to your liking.

2) Build up an array of Nikon lenses, along with a D800 whilst keeping the Canon gear. Treat the bodies as something that can be sold/traded/whatever. Then you simply sell your older body and buy the new one whenever one manufacturer makes a big leap over the other.

Thank you, there are yet more...

(by the way, 1 is a non sequitur - whether anything is worthwhile or not is a subjective judgement that does not necessarily lead exclusively to the conclusion you offer) For example, my 1932 Leica sits on the shelf and looks beautiful but makes no money and is rarely used. Yet I find it very worthwhile.

3) live with my 5D II and my excellent collection of Canon lenses, don't be a part of the consumerist imperative and thus contribute to both corporations' bottom line,  and wait for a camera that gives me improved results with the lenses I have. I am making money with the 5D II and can stick with it unless Canon provides something that will give me better results. Withholding my capital until then is the best strategy from my point of view.

[briansquibb]

Assuming this rumor is true, I'd think Canon would still wait a couple of years before releasing it.  Everyone that would buy a camera like this just bought a D800/e or Canon 5D III; and if you're a professional you purchased two or three of them.  It will be at least three years before I consider purchasing another camera.

Everyone?? I see a lot of 5D II owners like myself that are not pushed to go to a 5DIII at all. And put off by the pain of starting a Nikon lenses collection. 5K for a camera along these lines would cost the same as a D800 and a 14-24mm lens and I'd be back to using my Canon 14mm L, 17mm TSE L, 24mm TSE L, and 24mm 1.4 L for architecture and landscape. Sign me up!

There are a few possible approaches to take.

1) Recognise that actually owning camera equipment is not very worthwhile unless it is making you money and/or you're using it regularly and then when you need it, rent/hire whatever happens to be the latest/best.

1a) Start up a Nikon lens collection, whilst keeping your Canon lens collection and just rent whatever body happens to be the latest/best/to your liking.

2) Build up an array of Nikon lenses, along with a D800 whilst keeping the Canon gear. Treat the bodies as something that can be sold/traded/whatever. Then you simply sell your older body and buy the new one whenever one manufacturer makes a big leap over the other.

Thank you, there are yet more...

(by the way, 1 is a non sequitur - whether anything is worthwhile or not is a subjective judgement that does not necessarily lead exclusively to the conclusion you offer) For example, my 1932 Leica sits on the shelf and looks beautiful but makes no money and is rarely used. Yet I find it very worthwhile.

3) live with my 5D II and my excellent collection of Canon lenses, don't be a part of the consumerist imperative and thus contribute to both corporations' bottom line,  and wait for a camera that gives me improved results with the lenses I have. I am making money with the 5D II and can stick with it unless Canon provides something that will give me better results. Withholding my capital until then is the best strategy from my point of view.

also 1 assumes that photography is seen as a profession rather than a hobby

a generalised version of 3 might be that some owners sit on their hands and wallets until they are convinced that it is a good time to upgrade. These are the people that are the late users who wait until the technology is proven and the bugs have been sorted.

A good example of this from the Canon world might be the flash issues on the 5DIII where the 3rd party triggers dont work with HSS, or going back in time - the 1D3 AF problem

[pwp]

OMG how convoluted do you have to get?  Let's simplify this. He's just saying if you're in business you need to to make smart, informed purchase decisions. If you're not getting a viable ROI on any equipment purchase, then maybe it was not a smart purchase.

An enthusiast/collector with a 1932 Leica derives a different, yet tangible value from an apparently worthwhile purchase. They're both valid viewpoints.

PW

[briansquibb]

OMG how convoluted do you have to get?  Let's simplify this. He's just saying if you're in business you need to to make smart, informed purchase decisions. If you're not getting a viable ROI on any equipment purchase, then maybe it was not a smart purchase.

An enthusiast/collector with a 1932 Leica derives a different, yet tangible value from an apparently worthwhile purchase. They're both valid viewpoints.

PW

How do you measure ROI on a lens? or even a backup body?

[pwp]

Business management experience. Innate honest knowing. A clear head. Some things are not precisely measurable. You simply know.

PW

[briansquibb]

Business management experience. Innate honest knowing. A clear head. Some things are not precisely measurable. You simply know.

PW

I have only been able to work off the bottom line with hard and reliable numbers

[pwp]

Business management experience. Innate honest knowing. A clear head. Some things are not precisely measurable. You simply know.
PW

I have only been able to work off the bottom line with hard and reliable numbers

Well good. You get the last word.

PW

[Deeohuu]

OMG how convoluted do you have to get?  Let's simplify this. He's just saying if you're in business you need to to make smart, informed purchase decisions. If you're not getting a viable ROI on any equipment purchase, then maybe it was not a smart purchase.

An enthusiast/collector with a 1932 Leica derives a different, yet tangible value from an apparently worthwhile purchase. They're both valid viewpoints.

PW

Except that he didn't say "if you are in business".  Agreed that if you are in business you need to make smart decisions to stay in business but I don't believe the choices he gave are even the smartest for the majority of "pros".  It could argued that the wisest business move would be to stick with the 5D classic if it delivers what you need for your particular product niche. Why squander your profit on unnecessary technology? I think someone should write a paper on the whole misuse and erroneous presumptions about "pro" behaviour and the cult of pro expertise. Not only in the camera world but in all crafts. It was not long ago that pros were only those who belonged to self-governing trades such as law and medicine. Who needs a photo license to operate? Now the guy washing dishes in the back of the cafeteria is a 'professional' food service technician. There are as many pro hacks as untalented amateurs and many amateurs that produce images with the same quality as the "pros".  The average "pro" does not make an income that makes switching from other work attractive to many people and lord knows the effort to generate sales does not add to the lure. If camera companies only depended on pros for their bottom line they would be out of business.

It was the original post was not convoluted at all. The point was simple -  that there are more people holding back from the 5D III than any Canon I can remember and they are a good potential market for the rumoured camera that is the topic of this thread. That did not require any comments on possible non-economic ways of acquiring two brands.

Anyway, its a social forum, if we all simplified things to strict logic and and avoided diversions there would be no point in commenting on rumours like this hypothetical body at all and even less holiday from the drudgery of every day life which is what people are mostly doing here. If you don't like the convolution you are certainly welcome to complain just as others delight in adding to it.

[briansquibb]

Business management experience. Innate honest knowing. A clear head. Some things are not precisely measurable. You simply know.
PW

I have only been able to work off the bottom line with hard and reliable numbers

Well good. You get the last word.

PW

[wickidwombat]

keep going guys im nearly there...

http://bullshitbingo.net/cards/bullshit/